Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1973 · 50th Convention › Page 247

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1973, Page 247

front matter 1 front matter 2 front matter 3 front matter 4 front matter 5 front matter 6 front matter 7 front matter 8 front matter 9 front matter 10 front matter 11 front matter 12 front matter 13 front matter 14 front matter 15 front matter 16 front matter 17 front matter 18 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Page 205 Page 206 Page 207 Page 208 Page 209 Page 210 Page 211 Page 212 Page 213 Page 214 Page 215 Page 216 Page 217 Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 227 Page 228 Page 229 Page 230 Page 231 Page 232 Page 233 Page 234 Page 235 Page 236 Page 237 Page 238 Page 239 Page 240 Sheet 260 Page 6 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 Page 245 Page 246 Page 247 Page 248 Page 249 Page 250 Page 251 Page 252 Page 253 Page 254 Page 255 Page 256 Page 257 Page 258 Page 259 Page 260 Page 261 Page 262 Page 263 Page 264 Page 265 Page 266 Page 267 Page 268 Page 269 Page 270 Page 271 Page 272 Page 277 Page 280 Page 281 Page 282 Page 273 Page 276 Page 283 Page 284 Sheet 301 Page 7 Page 286 Page 287 Page 288 Page 289 Page 290 Page 291 Page 292 Page 293 Page 294 Page 295 Page 296 Page 297 Page 298 Page 299 Page 300 Page 301 Page 302 Page 303 Page 304 Page 305 Page 306 Page 307 Page 308 Page 309 Page 310 Page 311 Page 312 Page 313 Page 314 Page 315 Page 316 Page 317 Page 318 Page 319 Page 320 Page 321 Page 322 Page 323 Page 324 Page 325 Page 326 Page 327 Page 328 Page 329 Page 330 Page 331 Page 332 Page 333 Page 334 Page 335 Page 336 Page 337 Page 338 Page 339 Page 340 Page 341 Page 342 Page 343 Page 344 Page 345 Page 346 Page 347 Page 348 Page 349 Page 350 Page 351 Page 352 Page 353 Page 354 Page 355 Page 356 Page 357 Page 358 Page 359 Page 360 Page 361 Page 362 Page 363 Page 364 Page 365 Page 366 Page 367 Page 368 Page 369 Page 370 Page 371 Page 372 Page 373 Page 374 Page 375 Page 376 Page 377 Page 378 Page 379 Page 380 Page 381 Page 382 Page 383 Page 384 Page 385 Page 386 Page 387 Page 375 Page 376 Page 377 Page 378 Page 379 Page 380 Page 381 Page 382 Page 383 Page 384 Page 385 Page 386 Page 387 Page 388 Page 389 Page 390 Page 391 Page 392 Sheet 423 Sheet 424 Sheet 425 Sheet 426 Sheet 427 Sheet 428 Page 396 Page 397 Page 398 Sheet 432 Page 400 Sheet 434 Page 402 Sheet 436 Sheet 437 Sheet 438 Page 406 Sheet 440 Page 408 Sheet 442 Page 410 Sheet 444 Page 412 Sheet 446 Sheet 447 Sheet 448 Sheet 449 Sheet 450 Sheet 451 Sheet 452 Sheet 453 Sheet 454 Sheet 455 Sheet 456 Sheet 457 Sheet 458 Sheet 459 Page 427 Sheet 461 Page 430 Sheet 463 Page 432 Sheet 465 Sheet 466 Sheet 467 Page 436 Sheet 469 Sheet 470 Page 4 Page 440 Sheet 473 Page 442 Sheet 475 Page 444 Sheet 477 Page 446 Sheet 479 Sheet 480 Page 449 Page 450 Page 451 Page 452 Page 453 Page 454 Page 455 Page 456 Page 457 Sheet 490 Sheet 491 Sheet 492 Sheet 493 Sheet 494 Sheet 495 Sheet 496 Sheet 497 Sheet 498 Sheet 499 Sheet 500 Page 1 Page 470 Sheet 503 Page 472 Sheet 505 Page 474 Page 13 Page 476 Page 1 Sheet 510

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

HIGHER EDUCATION 247

placed into the highest priority category by the synodical officials
who are working with the distribution of thankoffering funds,
and hopefully will get under way in the coming months and
be completed during the next biennium.

This study as envisioned by the board will begin with the
premise that synodical higher education cannot operate effec-
tively on a ‘‘wait and see” basis. Such a basis ignores realities
and encourages the preservation of myths and wishful thinking.
It leads to harmful duplication of effort and to wasteful uses of
the already limited resources.

The board further believes that the future can, under God,
be determined by principles as well as by events, and by men
and women of the church no less than by the mere passage of
time. But, if men and women, guided by principles, are to make
wise decisions the all important, pertinent information must be
available to them regularly.

The board considers three characteristics basic to any for-
ward looking approach in synodical higher education at this
time. These are flexibility, concentration of resources, and
ongoing evaluation. Any planning, to serve our colleges and
seminaries effectively, must remain open to changes in curricu-
lum, methods of instruction and learning, educational finance,
and the manner in which our schools are structured and related
to one another. Planning must provide a way to abolish present
unnecessary duplication of effort, avoid future duplication,
and develop the special strengths of individual campuses. Plan-
ning must allow for regular ongoing evaluation of the entire
system and of each individual institution in the light of its
synodically approved objectives.

At the same time, the board hopes to keep the project close
to the hard political and fiscal realities. Closing or consolidating
schools will continue to be extremely difficult, if not impossible,
because of regional and school loyalties and the facts that
schools can only be closed by conventions or consolidated with
the agreement of the local board of control. Funds for higher
education are likely to continue to be limited, although hopefully
the decline in support can be halted.

Opportunities and Needs

As the board looks ahead, certain opportunities and needs
which reflect both where we are now and where we should be
aiming should be discussed.

—In Programs and Preparation for Vocation

As is obvious from the tone of this report, the board not only
feels that the schools of the Synod have continued to play an
important and legitimate role, but is also persuaded that they
are individually and collectively doing an excellent job. Con-
tinuous contact in many forms, by both board and staff members,
with each school at the operating level sustain this persuasion.
These contacts consist of regular academic and financial reports,
many personal observations, written and telephone communica-
tions, staff and department meetings, class visits, and literally
hundreds of interviews and conversations with administrators,
faculty members, students, and nonteaching staff members.

These observations point overwhelmingly to extremely care-
ful and conscientious management, dedicated leadership, com-
petent and highly professional teaching and guidance, and an
overall commitment of remarkable depth and vigor to the estab-
lished objectives of the institutions. Many testimonies by persons
outside our Synod, including members of accrediting teams and
representatives of other schools and churches support the
conviction that these conclusions are not simply due to family
loyalty.

Still, our board assumes that every institution can be im-
proved; we are not asking if our schools can be improved but
where? And how? We are continuously concerned about quality
of instruction, not because our instructors are incompetent
but because really masterful teaching is an evasive art which
demands self-evaluation and the evaluation of colleagues and
students if it is to remain alive and well. Obviously the most
highly educated and conscientious instructor can become book-
ish and unintelligible; he can unwittingly use methods and
vocabulary more appropriate to post-doctoral seminars than to
college freshmen.

It has been said that there is no college anywhere which is
not about to come out with a ‘‘new” curriculum, which the stu-
dents say they cannot distinguish from the old. But, in fact,
education today would be tragic and virtually hopeless if change

were not continuous. Academic specialities and practices and
private interests can quickly set into the hardest concrete,
requiring a jackhammer to prepare the way for something more
functional and meaningful.

Many special needs for institutional improvement can be
summarized by saying that more efforts need to be expended
to discover and become sensitive to the actual and total needs
of students. That is not intended to be simply a sentimental
and pious statement: it is meant to be a very realistic and hard-
headed one. We do not mean that education consists merely of
asking students what they would like to do (although student
suggestions are often profound, practical, and still universally
underrated). But we do acknowledge the truth of the old, old
observation that the only legitimate way to evaluate a school
is to look closely at its graduates as they function in their con-
temporary life and society. We confess with the old school-
marm that she is teaching children, not arithmetic (in this case,
persons rather than subjects). We must explore the implications
of every school’s written objectives about helping students to
develop all those skills and attitudes which will be important
to them in fulfilling their total vocational commitment.

All this means that we must keep one another sensitive to
such realities as the relationship of learning to readiness and
interest; the proportion and place of outside-the-classroom
learning: the importance in Christian education of relating ‘head
knowledge”’ to personal faith and life: the need to develop a
valid and distinctively Christian style of life that is appropriate
to our contemporary, urbanized, secular American society: the
basic Biblical idea of vocation as a dominant theme in personal
development and in establishing life-goals; the character of the
campus population as an integrated community rather than a
mass of transients; the need for interpersonal involvement as the
context and stimulus for ministerial preparation; and the need
to acquire a sense and use of freedom with responsibility as
prerequisite for adequate professional performance.

This educational table of duties (to which every thoughtful
educator would like to add a dozen more) becomes all the more
important as, for reasons discussed elsewhere in this report,
the number of non-church-work students enrolled in synodical
colleges increases. Nothing could be more disastrous to the
schools and to the students involved than to allow one half of
the school to be one kind of institution, preparing people for
a life of Christian ministry, and to let the other half of the school
be another kind of institution, ‘selling’ liberal arts education
to students whose occupational goals are of no special concern.
How to prepare students rocationally (not occupationally or
professionally) for careers other than the professional, public,
ecclesiastical ministry is the art which many of the schools need
to acquire rather quickly. Also needed are the additional
changes required in our schools if they are to become attractive
to students from racial and cultural minorities. The future suc-
cess in recruitment of these students is tied directly to the effec-
tiveness and speed of these changes.

—In Placement of Ministers

One development at the synodical colleges and seminaries
which drew the attention of many members of the church was
the shift in the supply/demand situation, that is, in the ratio of
candidates to calls. For many years the church had grown
accustomed to a shortage of candidates: more calls were sent
to the Board of Assignments annually than there were candi-
dates to fill them. After some years of gradual change, which
largely went unnoticed, the balance finally tipped. For the past
2 years there have seemingly been more candidates than calls.
The word ‘‘seemingly” is in order because the real situation
cannot be described so simply.

As might be expected, some panic developed. It was inevita-
ble that the word ‘overproduction’ should be immediately
tossed about. Middle-aged pastors and teachers quickly recalled
and recounted their unhappy experiences during the depression
and postdepression days. However, the months which have now
elapsed permit a somewhat different perspective.

It is, to begin with, somewhat misleading to use the term
“overproduction.” The schools are really not producing more
candidates; the church is using fewer. For many reasons — social,
ecclesiastical, and economic -— districts are opening fewer mis-
sions, congregations are opening fewer schools and classrooms,
some Lutheran elementary schools have been closed, agencies
are employing fewer personnel. Consequently, the traditional
demand is admittedly down.